Story 1: 94 Million Americans Not In Labor Force, Labor Participation Rate Stuck At 62.6% A 38 Year Low, Unemployment Rate Declines To 5.1% –8 Million Unemployed — Fed Will Increase Federal Funds Target Rate to .5% In September — Three Years Late As Usual — Call It Clueless PHDs Lag — Videos

U.S. Stocks Suffer Heavy Losses After Mixed Jobs Report

August Jobs Report Provides Mixed Message

US Economy Riding 66 Month Job Growth Streak

What to Watch Friday: Labor Department Releases August Jobs Report

Peter Schiff: U.S. problems are ‘homegrown’, China is not the problem

Peter Schiff: The U.S. Dollar is very overvalued and the dollar is a bubble

Keiser Report: Rule 48 (E806)

The labor force participation rate stayed stuck at 62.6 percent, a 38-year low, for a third straight month in August, the Labor Department reported on Friday. (AP File Photo)

(CNSNews.com) – A record 94,031,000 Americans were not in the American labor force last month — 261,000 more than July — and the labor force participation rate stayed stuck at 62.6 percent, a 38-year low, for a third straight month in August, the Labor Department reported on Friday, as the nation heads into the Labor Day weekend.

The number of Americans not in the labor force has continued to rise, partly because of retiring baby-boomers and fewer workers entering the workforce.

In August, according to BLS, the nation’s civilian noninstitutional population, consisting of all people 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution, reached 251,096,000. Of those, 157,065,000 participated in the labor force by either holding a job or actively seeking one.

The 157,065,000 who participated in the labor force equaled only 62.6 percent of the 251,096,000 civilian noninstitutional population — the same as it was in July and June. Not since October 1977, when the participation rate dropped to 62.4, has the percentage been this low.

Historical perspective

In January 1948 — the first year the data was recorded — 88.7 percent of men, aged 20 and older, were participating in the U.S. labor force. The rate first dipped below 80 percent in November 1975 (79.9%), spiraling steadily downward through August 2015, when 71.5 percent of men 20 and older were participating in the labor force.

It’s the opposite story for women 20 and older: In 1948, a time when one-earner incomes were generally sufficient to support the family, only 31 percent of women participated in the workforce. In May 1966, the rate climbed above 40 percent for the first time; it broke 50 percent in October 1978; and 60 percent in July 1996.

When Barack Obama took office in January 2009, 60.9 percent of women were particiating in the labor force, but after rising somewhat in that economically turbulent year, the particpation rate for women started heading down. Last month, it stood at 58.2 percent.

Other notes from Friday’s jobs report:

— In August, the economy added 173,000 jobs, and the uemmployment rate dropped a tenth of a point to 5.1 percent from 5.2 percent. Job gains occurred in health care and social assistance and in financial activities. Manufacturing and mining lost jobs.

— The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) held at 2.2 million in August and accounted for 27.7 percent of the unemployed. Over the past 12 months, the number of long-term unemployed is down by 779,000.

— The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) ticked up in August to 6,483,000, 158,000 more than the 6,325,000 recorded in July. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.

Unemployment rate plunge

Akin Oyedele

The economy added 173,000 jobs last month, fewer than expected, while the unemployment rate fell to 5.1% from 5.3%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

We also got some wage growth, with average hourly earnings rising 0.3% month-over-month and 2.5% year-on-year.

The number of job gains in July was revised up to 245,000 from 215,000.

As we outlined earlier, this report was expected to hugely influence market expectations for whether the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates at its meeting later this month. A strong report was seen to support other data we’ve recently received that show the economy is advancing at a steady pace — probably steady enough to warrant the first rate increase in a decade.

In a speech just before the jobs report, Richmond Fed president Jeffrey Lacker said the labor market supported the case for raising rates sooner rather than later. But this report was unlikely to “materially alter the labor market picture or, for that matter, the monetary policy outlook.”

Also, even though inflation is still off the Fed’s 2% target, wage growth was expected to boost confidence that it is on its way there.

Other secondary labor-market indicators had pointed to strong gains in August, including initial jobless claims, and the employment components of ISM manufacturing indexes.

And it turns out, history repeated itself. Deutsche Bank’s Joe Lavorgna had noted that job gains in August had missed consensus forecasts in 21 out of the past 27 years. He had forecast a payroll print of 170,000, below consensus and closer to the actual print.

By industry, employment in mining and manufacturing declined, while education and health services added the most jobs for any industry, at 62,000.

Stocks fell after the jobs report, and Dow futures lost more than 200 points.

Here’s what Wall Street was expecting, via Bloomberg:

Nonfarm payrolls: +217,000

Unemployment rate: 5.2%

Average hourly earnings, month-over-month: +0.2%

Average hourly earnings, year-over-year: +2.1%

Average weekly hours worked: 34.5

FREDAt 5.1%, the unemployment rate is at the lowest level since April 2008.

August Jobs Report: Everything You Need to Know

Welcome to “Jobs Friday,” that ever-so-brief moment when the interests of Wall Street, Washington and Main Street are all aligned on one thing: jobs.

Friday’s report was even more significant than usual, since it’s the last one officials from the Federal Reserve will see before they meet later this month to debate a potential interest-rate hike. A rate increase, if and when it comes, would be the first for the U.S. since 2006.

When the numbers came in at 8:30 a.m. New York time, they potentially muddied the waters instead of providing clarity. The Bureau of Labor Statistics said nonfarm payrolls rose a seasonally adjusted 173,000, well short of the 220,000 predicted by economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal. But the unemployment rate fell to 5.1% from 5.3%, and some of the other underlying numbers painted a rosier picture.

Here at MoneyBeat HQ, we crunched the data, tracked the markets and compiled the commentary in real time. Here’s how it all went down.

Good morning, folks. This is a big one. It’s the last jobs report before Federal Reserve officials sit down for their crucial Sept. 16-17 meeting to debate a potential rate hike—the first for the U.S. since 2006.

The key question: Fed policy makers in July said they were looking for “some” further improvement in the labor market before raising rates. But how much improvement qualifies as “some?”

Employers have added on average 211,000 jobs a month this year and the jobless rate has dropped 0.4 percentage point. Will that be enough to seal the deal? We won’t definitively know the answer today. But the economists, strategist and traders who plan to pour over every detail of this data dump are certainly going to try to guess.

6:37 am

The debate won’t be settled

by Jon Hilsenrath

Fed officials have been struggling to come to a common view on whether to raise short-term rates for the first time in nearly a decade at its September policy meeting. A strong report will strengthen the hand of officials arguing to raise rates in September; a weak report will strengthen the hands of officials who want to keep them near zero. Whether weak, strong or right down the middle, the numbers are going to leave some questions unanswered and doubts in the air.

6:38 am

Economists on the fence

by Justin Lahart

In early August, 82% of economists in The Wall Street Journal’s monthly forecasting survey thought the Fed’s policy-setting committee would raise interest rates at its meeting Sept. 16 and 17. But financial-market turmoil over the past few weeks has altered those odds. Now, economists as a group are on the fence on whether the Fed moves—some say probably yes, others probably no, others give even chances.

6:43 am

What this means for liftoff

by Kristen Scholer

Market turbulence around the world the past two weeks has raised the bar for a September rate increase.

As we wrote about in Friday’s Morning MoneyBeat, the Fed has long said strength in the labor market is key to its decision to raise rates. And for several months, economists have expected the August Nonfarm Payrolls report to provide the final go ahead for the central bank.

But, amid market volatility and continued low inflation, the Fed has more to consider than just the jobs report.

6:44 am

Ugly market mood greets jobs report

by Paul Vigna

Well, this is unusual. Most of these Jobs Friday days sees stock market idling ahead of the report. Not today. Futures are down sharply, taking their cues from Europe and Asia.

U.K. stocks are down 1.6%, and every other major market is in the red, too. The CAC-40 and Dax are both off 2.1%. In Asia, Chinese marekts are still closed for the holiday, but everything else is down. The Nikkei is off 2.2%. The Kospi is down 1.5%, and India’s Sensex is down 2.2%.

U.S. futures are down sharply. S&P 500 futures are down 18.5, and Dow futures are down 167.

The yield on the U.S. 10-year Treasury note has fallen to 2.14%, and WTI crude is down 0.7% at $46.43.

Does the market even care about the jobs report? Well, of course it does, and this one particularly. But the market is also caught in the vise grip of a global convulsion. The selloff has its own momentum, and it may wash right over this jobs report, no matter what the numbers say.

6:48 am

The August report has fallen short of expectations in 21 of the last 27 years

by Cynthia Lin

Ahead of the report, some economists have been warning that the first read has a history of falling short of expectations — only to get revised higher in the two subsequent months. The problem for the Fed is that it won’t see those revisions before its meeting later this month.

As we detailed earlier this week, economists at Deutsche Bank found that the August report has fallen short of expectations in 21 of the last 27 years, missing by an average 61,000. The tendency for August figures to miss (or for economists to over-predict) has Deutsche Bank forecasting a net gain of 170,000 jobs for the month. That’s a fair amount less than the median estimate of 220,000 from economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal.

Yet Wrightson ICAP found that August payrolls are the ones that get the biggest upward revisions. The final read that comes out two months later has been higher than the initial read in eight of the last nine Augusts – and by a not-insignificant amount of 66,000.

6:50 am

The perfect number

by Paul Vigna

You have to figure there’s some kind of number that would hit an equilibrium spot in terms of trader sentiment. Something weak enough to get the market thinking the Fed’s going to hold off, but not so weak that you have to start worrying about a global economic meltdown.

The Fed has continuously said it will up interest rates when the data supports it. And it has placed more emphasis on the strength of the labor market versus other factors like inflation.

But now, as markets have become more volatile since the Fed last met in July and since the last employment report was released at the beginning of August, Steven Englander, global head of G10 foreign exchange strategy at Citigroup Inc., thinks payrolls hold less weight in the Fed’s decision.

“After the July FOMC, we thought that the Fed lift-off decision was 75% NFP [Nonfarm payrolls] and 25% everything else,” he said. “Now we would think that the September lift-off decision is 40% NFP and 60% everything else.”

A continuing concern for the Fed has been the slow rise in wages despite the consistent increase in the number of jobs. The July jobs report found that the rise in hourly pay of nonsupervisory employees has been slowing. In July, earnings were 1.84% higher than a year ago, down from a 2% annual increase in earnings recorded in May. Friday’s report could hint at whether this slowdown is a momentary blip or a sign of something more lasting.

6:56 am

People still on the sidelines

by David Harrison

In addition, many Americans who dropped out of the workforce in the aftermath of the recession have yet to make their way back. In July, 62.6% of those ages 16 and over were either working or looking for work, the lowest level since 1977. While some of that drop is due to the retirement of baby boomers, it’s clear many people are still sitting on the sidelines.

6:57 am

Hawkish Lacker speech coming in ahead of the jobs report

by Paul Vigna

As if the market didn’t have enough to contend with, there is a Fed speech ahead of the jobs report, and we can already tell you it won’t be taking September off the table.

Jeffrey Lacker, president of the Richmond Fed, is speaking at 8:10 a.m., in Richmond. He’s talking to the Retail Merchants Association. We haven’t seen the prepared remarks, but we don’t really need to. The title of the speech tells you everything you need to know: “The Case Against Further Delay.”

Now, Lacker is one of the Fed’s most hawkish officials to begin with, so the angle isn’t unexpected. Still, those will not be comforting headlines for the bulls.

7:03 am

Another thought on the “right” number

by Paul Vigna

Citi’s Steven Englander has also pondered the equilibrium number, and he pegs it a bit higher than I did: 175,000-200,000. “Strong enough to be regarded as firm by markets (post expected revision) but weak enough for them to delay liftoff.”

He breaks it down further:

… 175,000-200,000 – strong enough to be regarded as firm by markets (post expected revision) but weak enough maybe for them to delay liftoff- so USD falls in G3, but global asset markets maybe calmer.

Worst number for EM – very strong +230,000 with upward revisions – Sept back in picture and CNY depreciation tensions increase – good for USD in G3 as well but that is not the story.

Terrible number below 175,000 with downward revisions – certainly bad for USD within G3, but growth pessimism may take down all asset markets.

Pretty good but not great – 200,000-230,000 with modest revision – would normally be good enough for Fed to move but now is not ‘normally’ — would be USD positive in G3 and EM – could see some divergence between US asset markets (ok) and EM (not so okay).

Despite published consensus of 217,000, there is so much discussion of downward bias and upward revisions that above 200,000 should probably be considered upside surprise.

I’d add only that a big factor in arriving at the “right” number is trying to figure out just how much growth the Fed will need to see to satisfy it. I personally think the bar is pretty low, which is why I came up with a lower number.

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until USDL-15-1697
8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, September 4, 2015
Technical information:
Household data: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cps
Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 * cesinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/ces
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- AUGUST 2015
Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 173,000 in August, and the
unemployment rate edged down to 5.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
reported today. Job gains occurred in health care and social assistance and in
financial activities. Manufacturing and mining lost jobs.
Household Survey Data
In August, the unemployment rate edged down to 5.1 percent, and the number of
unemployed persons edged down to 8.0 million. Over the year, the unemployment
rate and the number of unemployed persons were down by 1.0 percentage point
and 1.5 million, respectively. (See table A-1.)
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for whites declined to
4.4 percent in August. The rates for adult men (4.7 percent), adult women
(4.7 percent), teenagers (16.9 percent), blacks (9.5 percent), Asians
(3.5 percent), and Hispanics (6.6 percent) showed little change in August.
(See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)
The number of persons unemployed for less than 5 weeks decreased by 393,000
to 2.1 million in August. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless
for 27 weeks or more) held at 2.2 million in August and accounted for 27.7
percent of the unemployed. Over the past 12 months, the number of long-term
unemployed is down by 779,000. (See table A-12.)
In August, the civilian labor force participation rate was 62.6 percent for
the third consecutive month. The employment-population ratio, at 59.4 percent,
was about unchanged in August and has shown little movement thus far this
year. (See table A-1.)
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes
referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed in August
at 6.5 million. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time
employment, were working part time because their hours had been cut back or
because they were unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)
In August, 1.8 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force,
down by 329,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)
These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available
for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They
were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in
the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)
Among the marginally attached, there were 624,000 discouraged workers in
August, down by 151,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally
adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work
because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.2
million persons marginally attached to the labor force in August had not
searched for work for reasons such as school attendance or family
responsibilities. (See table A-16.)
Establishment Survey Data
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 173,000 in August. Over the prior
12 months, employment growth had averaged 247,000 per month. In August, job
gains occurred in health care and social assistance and in financial
activities. Employment in manufacturing and mining declined. (See
table B-1.)
Health care and social assistance added 56,000 jobs in August. Health care
employment increased by 41,000 over the month, with job growth occurring in
ambulatory health care services (+21,000) and hospitals (+16,000). Employment
rose by 16,000 in social assistance, which includes child day care services
and services for the elderly and disabled. Over the year, employment has
risen by 457,000 in health care and by 107,000 in social assistance.
In August, financial activities employment increased by 19,000, with job
gains in real estate (+8,000) and in securities, commodity contracts, and
investments (+5,000). Over the year, employment in financial activities has
grown by 170,000.
Employment in professional and business services continued to trend up in
August (+33,000) and has increased by 641,000 over the year.
Employment in food services and drinking places continued on an upward trend
in August (+26,000), in line with its average monthly gain of 31,000 over
the prior 12 months.
Manufacturing employment decreased by 17,000 in August, after changing little
in July (+12,000). Job losses occurred in a number of component industries,
including fabricated metal products and food manufacturing (-7,000 each).
These losses more than offset gains in motor vehicles and parts (+6,000) and
in miscellaneous durable goods manufacturing (+4,000). Thus far this year,
overall employment in manufacturing has shown little net change.
Employment in mining fell in August (-9,000), with losses concentrated in
support activities for mining (-7,000). Since reaching a peak in December 2014,
mining employment has declined by 90,000.
Employment in other major industries, including construction, wholesale
trade, retail trade, transportation and warehousing, and government,
showed little change over the month.
The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged up
by 0.1 hour to 34.6 hours in August. The manufacturing workweek was unchanged
at 40.8 hours, and factory overtime edged down by 0.1 hour to 3.3 hours. The
average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private
nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at 33.7 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)
In August, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm
payrolls rose by 8 cents to $25.09, following a 6-cent gain in July. Hourly
earnings have risen by 2.2 percent over the year. Average hourly earnings
of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees increased by 5
cents to $21.07 in August. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for June was revised from
+231,000 to +245,000, and the change for July was revised from +215,000 to
+245,000. With these revisions, employment gains in June and July combined
were 44,000 more than previously reported. Over the past 3 months, job
gains have averaged 221,000 per month.
_____________
The Employment Situation for September is scheduled to be released on
Friday, October 2, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| 2015 CES Preliminary Benchmark Revision to be released |
| on September 17, 2015 |
| |
| Each year, the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey estimates are |
| benchmarked to comprehensive counts of employment from the Quarterly |
| Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) for the month of March. These counts |
| are derived from state unemployment insurance (UI) tax records that nearly |
| all employers are required to file. On September 17, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. |
| (EDT), the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) will release the preliminary |
| estimate of the upcoming annual benchmark revision to the establishment |
| survey employment series. This is the same day the First Quarter 2015 data |
| from the QCEW will be issued. Preliminary benchmark revisions for all |
| major industry sectors, as well as total nonfarm and total private levels, |
| will be available on the BLS website at |
| www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesprelbmk.htm. |
| |
| The final benchmark revision will be issued with the publication of the |
| January 2016 Employment Situation news release in February. |
| |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

– Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data.
NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

Footnotes(1) Includes other industries, not shown separately.(2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries.(3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours.(4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls.(5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment.(p) Preliminary

NOTE: Data have been revised to reflect March 2014 benchmark levels and updated seasonal adjustment factors.

Story 1: Biden/Warren Democratic Ticket? — World Stock Markets Crash! — Trump Breaks New Ceiling in Polls — Trump A Leader — Political Elitist Establishment Panic — American People Want To Make America Great Again — Vidoes

Keiser Report: China Mainland MSM Myths (E704)

Is China’s Economy On The Verge Of Collapse?

China Reality Check: Has the Hard Landing in China Already Started?

China’s economic growth rate fell to 7.4% in 2014, and many believe the official figure is actually more generous than the reality. Most forecasts expect growth to come in well under 7.0% in 2015. What are we to make of these trends? Are we at the beginning of a hard landing where the long history of structural inefficiencies are finally and inescapably being revealed and the possibilities of a financial crisis more ever looming? Or are we in a gradual shift toward a “new normal” of healthier and still relatively robust growth as a result of foresighted policy adjustments? Or is something else going on altogether? Anne Stevenson-Yang, co-founder of J Capital Research, is a veteran analyst of the China’s economy and economic policy process. She travels widely in China in order to compare official data with actual behavior and performance. Bob Davis of the Wall Street Journal is a leading expert on macroeconomic policy and recently completed an extended posting in Beijing, where he wrote regularly about China’s economy.

Why 99% of trading is pointless

Published: Aug 1, 2015

An astonishing $32 trillion in securities changes hands every year with no net positive impact for investors, charges Vanguard Group Founder John Bogle.

Meanwhile, corporate finance — the reason Wall Street exists — is just a tiny slice of the total business. The nation’s big investment banks probably could work for less than a week and take the rest of the year off with no real effect on the economy.

“The job of finance is to provide capital to companies. We do it to the tune of $250 billion a year in IPOs and secondary offerings,” Bogle told Time in an interview.
“What else do we do? We encourage investors to trade about $32 trillion a year. So the way I calculate it, 99% of what we do in this industry is people trading with one another, with a gain only to the middleman. It’s a waste of resources.”

Rent seekers

It’s a lot of money, $32 trillion. Nearly double the entire U.S. economy moving from one pocket to another, with a toll-taker in the middle. Most people refer to them as “stock brokers,” but let’s call them what they are — toll-takers and rent-seekers.

Rent-seeking as an occupation is as old as the hills. In exchange for working to build up credentials and relative fluency in the arcane rules of an industry, one gets to stand back from actual work and just collect money.

Ostensibly, the job of a financial adviser is to provide advice. Do you actually get that from your broker? It is worth anything?

Research shows, over and over, that stock brokers can’t do much of anything demonstrably valuable. They don’t know which stocks will go up or down and when. They don’t know which asset classes will outperform this year or next.

Nobody knows. That’s the point. If you’re among that small cadre of extremely high-level traders who can throw loads of cash at a short-term fluke, fantastic. If you have a mind for numbers like Warren Buffett that allows you to buy companies on the cheap and hold them forever, excellent.

If you’re a normal retirement investor trying to get from A to B and retire on time, well, you have a really big problem to face: The toll-taker wants your money.

Dead weight

So he needs you to trade — a lot. Because that’s how stock brokers make money. Not by doling out retirement advice, but by ensuring that your account is active and churning commissions on behalf of them and their employers.

What’s a highway with no traffic on it? If you’re a toll-taker, it’s a money loser. So Wall Street’s rent-seekers need traffic in the form of regular trading. An account that sits invested for months at a time with no trades is dead weight to them.

Nevertheless, as Bogle maintains, doing nothing is the key. “Don’t do something, just stand there!” he has often said.

A portfolio indexing approach to investing codifies Bogle’s time-tested and effective way of investing for retirement — without lining the pockets of toll-taking stock brokers along the way.

Trump widens lead over U.S. Republican presidential field: Reuters poll

By Emily Stephenson

Republican Donald Trump is pulling away from the pack in the race for the party’s U.S. presidential nomination, widening his lead over his closest rivals in the past week, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Friday.

Republican voters show no signs they are growing weary of the brash real estate mogul, who has dominated political headlines and the 17-strong Republican presidential field with his tough talk about immigration and insults directed at his political rivals. The candidates are vying to be nominated to represent their party in the November 2016 general election.

Nearly 32 percent of Republicans surveyed online said they backed Trump, up from 24 percent a week earlier, the opinion poll found. Trump had nearly double the support of his closest competitor, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who got 16 percent. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson was third at 8 percent.

Even when Trump was pitted directly in the poll against just his top two competitors, 44 percent backed him. Bush won about 29 percent of respondents, and Carson 25 percent.

“He’s not taking any guff from anybody,” Dewey Stedman, 70, a Republican from East Wenatchee, Washington, said of the publicity-loving billionaire. “If you don’t have something in your brains, you’re not going to have billions of dollars.”

View gallery

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gives a thumbs up to supporters as he is driven …

Trump has driven the debate on the campaign trail with a hard-line immigration plan that calls for the deportation of undocumented immigrants, amendment of the Constitution to end automatic citizenship for all people born in the United States, and construction of a wall along the border with Mexico.

He also has feuded with Bush and other rivals while boasting he could easily beat Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton.

Trump’s campaign momentum has paid off with bigger crowds on the campaign trail. On Friday night, he moved a planned rally in Mobile, Alabama, to a football stadium seating more than 40,000.

“It is an appeal to people that are just aggravated about what’s going on,” Republican strategist Rich Galen said, adding that Trump is a “novelty act” that voters will tire of.

Friday’s results in the online rolling opinion poll are based on a survey of 501 Republicans and have a credibility interval of plus or minus 5 percent.

Separate results found Clinton leading among Democrats, though support for her dipped below 50 percent to 48.5 percent.

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont came in second in the poll of 625 Democrats, followed by Vice President Joe Biden, who has not entered the race. That survey had a credibility interval of plus or minus 4.5 percent.

Not In Labor Force

93,194,000

Series Id: LNS15000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Not in Labor Force
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over

Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2000

69142

69120

69338

69267

69853

69876

70398

70401

70645

70782

70579

70488

2001

70088

70409

70381

70956

71414

71592

71526

72136

71676

71817

71876

72010

2002

72623

72010

72343

72281

72260

72600

72827

72856

72554

73026

73508

73675

2003

73960

74015

74295

74066

74268

73958

74767

75062

75249

75324

75280

75780

2004

75319

75648

75606

75907

75903

75735

75730

76113

76526

76399

76259

76581

2005

76808

76677

76846

76514

76409

76673

76721

76642

76739

76958

77138

77394

2006

77339

77122

77161

77318

77359

77317

77535

77451

77757

77634

77499

77376

2007

77506

77851

77982

78818

78810

78671

78904

79461

79047

79532

79105

79238

2008

78554

79156

79087

79429

79102

79314

79395

79466

79790

79736

80189

80380

2009

80529

80374

80953

80762

80705

80938

81367

81780

82495

82766

82865

83813

2010

83349

83304

83206

82707

83409

84075

84199

84014

84347

84895

84590

85240

2011

85390

85624

85623

85580

85821

86140

86395

86125

85986

86335

86351

86624

2012

87824

87696

87839

88195

88066

88068

88427

88840

88713

88491

88870

88797

2013

88838

89432

89969

89774

89801

89791

90124

90430

90620

91766

91263

91698

2014

91429

91398

91077

92019

91993

92114

91975

92210

92601

92414

92442

92898

2015

92544

92898

93175

93194

Total Unemployment Rate U-6

10.8%

Series Id: LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status: Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
Percent/rates: Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2000

7.1

7.2

7.1

6.9

7.1

7.0

7.0

7.1

7.0

6.8

7.1

6.9

2001

7.3

7.4

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.9

7.8

8.1

8.7

9.3

9.4

9.6

2002

9.5

9.5

9.4

9.7

9.5

9.5

9.6

9.6

9.6

9.6

9.7

9.8

2003

10.0

10.2

10.0

10.2

10.1

10.3

10.3

10.1

10.4

10.2

10.0

9.8

2004

9.9

9.7

10.0

9.6

9.6

9.5

9.5

9.4

9.4

9.7

9.4

9.2

2005

9.3

9.3

9.1

8.9

8.9

9.0

8.8

8.9

9.0

8.7

8.7

8.6

2006

8.4

8.4

8.2

8.1

8.2

8.4

8.5

8.4

8.0

8.2

8.1

7.9

2007

8.4

8.2

8.0

8.2

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.8

2008

9.2

9.0

9.1

9.2

9.7

10.1

10.5

10.8

11.0

11.8

12.6

13.6

2009

14.2

15.2

15.8

15.9

16.5

16.5

16.4

16.7

16.7

17.1

17.1

17.1

2010

16.7

17.0

17.1

17.1

16.6

16.4

16.4

16.5

16.8

16.6

16.9

16.6

2011

16.2

16.0

15.9

16.1

15.8

16.1

15.9

16.1

16.3

15.8

15.5

15.2

2012

15.2

15.0

14.5

14.6

14.8

14.8

14.8

14.6

14.7

14.4

14.4

14.4

2013

14.5

14.3

13.8

14.0

13.8

14.2

13.8

13.6

13.6

13.7

13.1

13.1

2014

12.7

12.6

12.6

12.3

12.1

12.0

12.2

12.0

11.7

11.5

11.4

11.2

2015

11.3

11.0

10.9

10.8

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until USDL-15-0838
8:30 a.m. (EDT) Friday, May 8, 2015
Technical information:
Household data: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cps
Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 * cesinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/ces
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- APRIL 2015
Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 223,000 in April, and the
unemployment rate was essentially unchanged at 5.4 percent, the U.S. Bureau
of Labor Statistics reported today. Job gains occurred in professional and
business services, health care, and construction. Mining employment
continued to decline.
Household Survey Data
In April, both the unemployment rate (5.4 percent) and the number of
unemployed persons (8.5 million) were essentially unchanged. Over the
year, the unemployment rate and the number of unemployed persons were down
by 0.8 percentage point and 1.1 million, respectively. (See table A-1.)
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for Asians increased
to 4.4 percent. The rates for adult men (5.0 percent), adult women (4.9
percent), teenagers (17.1 percent), whites (4.7 percent), blacks (9.6
percent), and Hispanics (6.9 percent) showed little or no change in April.
(See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)
The number of persons unemployed for less than 5 weeks increased by 241,000
to 2.7 million in April. The number of long-term unemployed (those
jobless for 27 weeks or more) changed little at 2.5 million, accounting
for 29.0 percent of the unemployed. Over the past 12 months, the number
of long-term unemployed has decreased by 888,000. (See table A-12.)
In April, the civilian labor force participation rate (62.8 percent)
changed little. Since April 2014, the participation rate has remained
within a narrow range of 62.7 percent to 62.9 percent. The employment-
population ratio held at 59.3 percent in April and has been at this level
since January. (See table A-1.)
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes
referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed at 6.6
million in April, but is down by 880,000 from a year earlier. These
individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working
part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were
unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)
In April, 2.1 million persons were marginally attached to the labor
force, little changed over the year. (The data are not seasonally
adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and
were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior
12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not
searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)
Among the marginally attached, there were 756,000 discouraged workers
in April, little different from a year earlier. (The data are not
seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not currently
looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them.
The remaining 1.4 million persons marginally attached to the labor
force in April had not searched for work for reasons such as school
attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)
Establishment Survey Data
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 223,000 in April, after
edging up in March (+85,000). In April, employment increased in
professional and business services, health care, and construction,
while employment in mining continued to decline. (See table B-1.)
Professional and business services added 62,000 jobs in April.
Over the prior 3 months, job gains averaged 35,000 per month. In
April, services to buildings and dwellings added 16,000 jobs,
following little change in March. Employment continued to trend up
in April in computer systems design and related services (+9,000),
in business support services (+7,000), and in management and
technical consulting services (+6,000).
Health care employment increased by 45,000 in April. Job growth was
distributed among the three major components--ambulatory health care
services (+25,000), hospitals (+12,000), and nursing and residential
care facilities (+8,000). Over the past year, health care has added
390,000 jobs.
Employment in construction rose by 45,000 in April, after changing
little in March. Over the past 12 months, construction has added
280,000 jobs. In April, job growth was concentrated in specialty
trade contractors (+41,000), with employment gains about evenly
split between the residential and nonresidential components.
Employment declined over the month in nonresidential building
construction (-8,000).
In April, employment continued to trend up in transportation and
warehousing (+15,000).
Employment in mining fell by 15,000 in April, with most of the job
loss in support activities for mining (-10,000) and in oil and gas
extraction (-3,000). Since the beginning of the year, employment
in mining has declined by 49,000, with losses concentrated in
support activities for mining.
Employment in other major industries, including manufacturing,
wholesale trade, retail trade, information, financial activities,
leisure and hospitality, and government, showed little change
over the month.
The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls
remained at 34.5 hours in April. The manufacturing workweek for
all employees edged down by 0.1 hour to 40.8 hours, and factory
overtime edged down by 0.1 hour to 3.2 hours. The average workweek
for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm
payrolls was unchanged at 33.7 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)
In April, average hourly earnings for all employees on private
nonfarm payrolls rose by 3 cents to $24.87. Over the past 12
months, average hourly earnings have increased by 2.2 percent.
Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and
nonsupervisory employees edged up by 2 cents to $20.90 in April.
(See tables B-3 and B-8.)
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was
revised from +264,000 to +266,000, and the change for March was
revised from +126,000 to +85,000. With these revisions,
employment gains in February and March combined were 39,000
lower than previously reported. Over the past 3 months, job
gains have averaged 191,000 per month.
_____________
The Employment Situation for May is scheduled to be released
on Friday, June 5, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. (EDT).
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Civilian noninstitutional population247,439249,899250,080250,266186Civilian labor force155,420157,002156,906157,072166Participation rate62.862.862.762.80.1Employed145,724148,297148,331148,523192Employment-population ratio58.959.359.359.30.0Unemployed9,6968,7058,5758,549-26Unemployment rate6.25.55.55.4-0.1Not in labor force92,01992,89893,17593,19419Unemployment rates
Total, 16 years and over6.25.55.55.4-0.1Adult men (20 years and over)5.95.25.15.0-0.1Adult women (20 years and over)5.74.94.94.90.0Teenagers (16 to 19 years)19.117.117.517.1-0.4White5.34.74.74.70.0Black or African American11.410.410.19.6-0.5Asian5.94.03.24.41.2Hispanic or Latino ethnicity7.56.66.86.90.1Total, 25 years and over5.24.54.44.50.1Less than a high school diploma8.88.48.68.60.0High school graduates, no college6.35.45.35.40.1Some college or associate degree5.65.14.84.7-0.1Bachelor’s degree and higher3.32.72.52.70.2Reason for unemployment
Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs5,1534,1804,1894,136-53Job leavers786884875828-47Reentrants2,6312,6552,6892,685-4New entrants1,05297281586853Duration of unemployment
Less than 5 weeks2,4512,4312,4882,7292415 to 14 weeks2,3462,2232,3122,307-515 to 26 weeks1,5091,3351,2531,139-11427 weeks and over3,4132,7092,5632,525-38Employed persons at work part time
Part time for economic reasons7,4606,6356,7056,580-125Slack work or business conditions4,5173,8474,0693,885-184Could only find part-time work2,6242,4262,3372,37437Part time for noneconomic reasons18,91519,83719,73320,056323Persons not in the labor force (not seasonally adjusted)
Marginally attached to the labor force2,1602,1592,0552,115–Discouraged workers783732738756–– Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data.
NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htmEmployment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjustedhttp://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.b.htm2015 April Job Cut Report: Cuts Surge to 61,582, 3-Year High

Falling oil prices contributed to a 68 percent surge in job cuts last month, as US-based employers announced workforce reductions totaling 61,582 in April, up from 36,594 in March, according to the latest report on monthly layoffs released Thursday by global outplacement consultancy Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc.

The April total was 53 percent higher than the same month a year ago, when 40,298 planned job cuts were recorded. It represents the highest monthly total since May 2012 (61,887) and the highest April total since 2009 (132,590).

Year to date, employers have announced 201,796 planned job cuts, which marks a 25 percent increase from the 161,639 layoffs tracked in the first four months of 2014. This is the largest four-month total since 2010.

Driving the increased pace of job cutting in April and for the year is the dramatic decline in oil prices, which is forcing producers and suppliers to cut production. Of the 61,582 job cut announced last month, 20,675 or 34 percent were directly attributed to oil prices.

For the year, oil prices were blamed for 68,285 job cuts, or about 34 percent of the 201,796 planned layoffs announced between January 1 and April 30.

“Schlumberger, Baker Hughes and Halliburton have all announced multiple rounds of job cuts in recent months, including April. The largest job cut of the month came from Schlumberger, which announced that it will shed 11,000 workers, in addition to the 9,000 laid off in January,” said John A. Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

“The jobs that are most vulnerable are those in the field – engineers, oil rig operators, drill operators, refinery operators, etc. Managers and executives in the corporate offices are more secure, but the drop in oil prices is leading to increased merger activity, which could put more executives at risk of job loss,” said Challenger.

Most of the oil-related layoffs have occurred in the energy sector, which is the top job-cutting industry to date, with 57,556 planned cuts. That is more than double the second-ranked retail sector, which has announced 26,096 job cuts this year.

The pace of retail sector job cuts is slightly higher than a year ago, when these employers announced 25,224 job cuts through the first four months.

“Low oil prices should be helping retailers. However, the extra money in Americans’ wallets do not appear to be making it into the nation’s cash registers. Retail sales have been lackluster, at best. Furthermore, consumer products giant Procter & Gamble announced in April that it would reduce its headcount by as many as 6,000 workers over the next two years, following a poor earnings report,” noted Challenger.

“We could be witnessing the after-effect of the severe and protracted recession. Much like the generation that lived through the Great Depression, those who scraped by during the recession are being extra careful with their money. Another factor is that not everyone’s boat is rising with the tide. Many Americans are still struggling to find work and those that do are not earning as much they once did,” he said.

– Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data.
NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

Footnotes(1) Includes other industries, not shown separately.(2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries.(3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours.(4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls.(5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment.(p) Preliminary

NOTE: Data have been revised to reflect March 2014 benchmark levels and updated seasonal adjustment factors.

Amazing seven year old sings Fly Me To The Moon (Angelina Jordan) on Senkveld “The Late Show”

Forrest Gump JFK “I Gotta Pee” Scene

Fed Decision: The Three Most Important Things Janet Yellen Said

Press Conference with Chair of the FOMC, Janet L. Yellen

Monetary Policy Based on the Taylor Rule

Many economists believe that rules-based monetary policy provides better economic outcomes than a purely discretionary framework delivers. But there is disagreement about the advantages of rules-based policy and even disagreement about which rule works. One possible policy rule would be for the central bank to follow a Taylor Rule, named after our featured speaker, John B. Taylor. What would some of the advantages of a Taylor Rule be versus, for instance, a money growth rule, or a rule which only specifies the inflation target? How could a policy rule be implemented? Should policy rule legislation be considered? Join us as Professor Taylor addresses these important policy questions.

Friedrich Hayek: Why Intellectuals Drift Towards Socialism

Capitalism, Socialism, and the Jews

The Normal State of Man: Misery & Tyranny

Larry Kotlikoff on the Clash of Generations

Extended interview with Boston University Economics Professor Larry Kotlikoff on his publications about a six-decade long Ponzi scheme in the US which he says will lead to a clash of generations.

Kotlikoff also touches on what his projections mean for the New Zealand economy and why Prime Minister John Key should take more attention of New Zealand’s ‘fiscal gap’ – the gap between all future government spending commitments and its future revenue track.

Thomas Sowell on Intellectuals and Society

Angelina Jordan – summertime

Angelina Jordan synger Sinatra i semifinalen i Norske Talenter 2014

Release Date: March 18, 2015

For immediate release

Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in January suggests that economic growth has moderated somewhat. Labor market conditions have improved further, with strong job gains and a lower unemployment rate. A range of labor market indicators suggests that underutilization of labor resources continues to diminish. Household spending is rising moderately; declines in energy prices have boosted household purchasing power. Business fixed investment is advancing, while the recovery in the housing sector remains slow and export growth has weakened. Inflation has declined further below the Committee’s longer-run objective, largely reflecting declines in energy prices. Market-based measures of inflation compensation remain low; survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects that, with appropriate policy accommodation, economic activity will expand at a moderate pace, with labor market indicators continuing to move toward levels the Committee judges consistent with its dual mandate. The Committee continues to see the risks to the outlook for economic activity and the labor market as nearly balanced. Inflation is anticipated to remain near its recent low level in the near term, but the Committee expects inflation to rise gradually toward 2 percent over the medium term as the labor market improves further and the transitory effects of energy price declines and other factors dissipate. The Committee continues to monitor inflation developments closely.

To support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability, the Committee today reaffirmed its view that the current 0 to 1/4 percent target range for the federal funds rate remains appropriate. In determining how long to maintain this target range, the Committee will assess progress–both realized and expected–toward its objectives of maximum employment and 2 percent inflation. This assessment will take into account a wide range of information, including measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial and international developments. Consistent with its previous statement, the Committee judges that an increase in the target range for the federal funds rate remains unlikely at the April FOMC meeting. The Committee anticipates that it will be appropriate to raise the target range for the federal funds rate when it has seen further improvement in the labor market and is reasonably confident that inflation will move back to its 2 percent objective over the medium term. This change in the forward guidance does not indicate that the Committee has decided on the timing of the initial increase in the target range.

The Committee is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. This policy, by keeping the Committee’s holdings of longer-term securities at sizable levels, should help maintain accommodative financial conditions.

When the Committee decides to begin to remove policy accommodation, it will take a balanced approach consistent with its longer-run goals of maximum employment and inflation of 2 percent. The Committee currently anticipates that, even after employment and inflation are near mandate-consistent levels, economic conditions may, for some time, warrant keeping the target federal funds rate below levels the Committee views as normal in the longer run.

Note: Projections of change in real gross domestic product (GDP) and projections for both measures of inflation are percent changes from the fourth quarter of the previous year to the fourth quarter of the year indicated. PCE inflation and core PCE inflation are the percentage rates of change in, respectively, the price index for personal consumption expenditures (PCE) and the price index for PCE excluding food and energy. Projections for the unemployment rate are for the average civilian unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of the year indicated. Each participant’s projections are based on his or her assessment of appropriate monetary policy. Longer-run projections represent each participant’s assessment of the rate to which each variable would be expected to converge under appropriate monetary policy and in the absence of further shocks to the economy. The December projections were made in conjunction with the meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee on December 16-17, 2014.

1. The central tendency excludes the three highest and three lowest projections for each variable in each year. Return to table

2. The range for a variable in a given year includes all participants’ projections, from lowest to highest, for that variable in that year. Return to table

3. Longer-run projections for core PCE inflation are not collected. Return to table

Figure 1. Central tendencies and ranges of economic projections, 2015-17 and over the longer run

Central tendencies and ranges of economic projections for years 2015 through 2017 and over the longer run. Actual values for years 2010 through 2014.

Change in real GDPPercent

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Longer Run

Actual

2.7

1.7

1.6

3.1

2.4

–

–

–

–

Upper End of Range

–

–

–

–

–

3.1

3.0

2.5

2.5

Upper End of Central Tendency

–

–

–

–

–

2.7

2.7

2.4

2.3

Lower End of Central Tendency

–

–

–

–

–

2.3

2.3

2.0

2.0

Lower End of Range

–

–

–

–

–

2.1

2.2

1.8

1.8

Unemployment ratePercent

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Longer Run

Actual

9.5

8.7

7.8

7.0

5.7

–

–

–

–

Upper End of Range

–

–

–

–

–

5.3

5.2

5.5

5.8

Upper End of Central Tendency

–

–

–

–

–

5.2

5.1

5.1

5.2

Lower End of Central Tendency

–

–

–

–

–

5.0

4.9

4.8

5.0

Lower End of Range

–

–

–

–

–

4.8

4.5

4.8

4.9

PCE inflationPercent

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Longer Run

Actual

1.3

2.7

1.6

1.0

1.1

–

–

–

–

Upper End of Range

–

–

–

–

–

1.5

2.4

2.2

2.0

Upper End of Central Tendency

–

–

–

–

–

0.8

1.9

2.0

2.0

Lower End of Central Tendency

–

–

–

–

–

0.6

1.7

1.9

2.0

Lower End of Range

–

–

–

–

–

0.6

1.6

1.7

2.0

Note: Definitions of variables are in the general note to the projections table. The data for the actual values of the variables are annual.

Note: In the upper panel, the height of each bar denotes the number of FOMC participants who judge that, under appropriate monetary policy, the first increase in the target range for the federal funds rate from its current range of 0 to 1/4 percent will occur in the specified calendar year. In December 2014, the numbers of FOMC participants who judged that the first increase in the target federal funds rate would occur in 2015, and 2016 were, respectively, 15, and 2.

Appropriate pace of policy firming: Midpoint of target range or target level for the federal funds rateNumber of participants with projected midpoint of target range or target level

Midpoint of target range
or target level (Percent)

2015

2016

2017

Longer Run

0.125

2

0.250

0.375

1

1

0.500

0.625

7

0.750

0.875

3

1.000

1.125

1

1

1.250

1.375

2

1.500

1.625

1

6

1.750

1.875

3

2.000

1

2.125

1

2.250

1

2.375

2.500

2.625

1

3

2.750

2.875

2

3.000

1

3.125

4

3.250

3.375

2

1

3.500

7

3.625

2

3.750

1

2

6

3.875

1

4.000

1

2

4.125

4.250

1

Note: In the lower panel, each shaded circle indicates the value (rounded to the nearest 1/8 percentage point) of an individual participant’s judgment of the midpoint of the appropriate target range for the federal funds rate or the appropriate target level for the federal funds rate at the end of the specified calendar year or over the longer run.

Janet Yellen Isn’t Going to Raise Interest Rates Until She’s Good and Ready

The key words in Janet L. Yellen’s news conference Wednesday were rather pithy, at least by central bank standards. “Just because we removed the word ‘patient’ from the statement doesn’t mean we are going to be impatient,” Ms. Yellen, the Federal Reserve chairwoman, said.

With this framing, Ms. Yellen was putting her firm stamp on the policy of an institution she has led for just over a year — and making clear that she will not be boxed in. Her words and accompanying announcements conveyed the message that the Yellen Fed has no intention of taking the support struts of low interest rates away until she is absolutely confident that economic growth will hold up without them.

Earlier Wednesday afternoon, the Fed’s policy committee had removed a promise to be “patient” about raising interest rates from its written statement, something financial markets have anticipated for months as a sign that interest rate increases are coming soon. But Ms. Yellen managed a delicate task of changing that language to obtain flexibility without setting the Fed on a preordained course to tighter money.

Photo

Janet Yellen held a news conference after a meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee in Washington on Wednesday.CreditChip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Ms. Yellen’s comments about patience versus impatience were part of that dance. But the dual message was even more powerful when combined with other elements of the central bank’s newly released information, which sent the signal that members of the committee intend to move cautiously on rate increases.

By eliminating the reference to “patience,” Paul Edelstein, an economist at IHS Global Insight, said in a research note, “The Fed did what it was expected to do.”

“But beyond that,” he added, “the committee appeared much more dovish and in not much of a hurry to actually pull the trigger.”

Fed officials’ forecasts of how high rates will be at year’s end for 2015, 2016 and 2017 all fell compared to where they were in December. They marked down their forecast for economic growth and inflation for all three years, implying that the nation’s economic challenge is tougher and inflation risks more distant than they had seemed a few months ago.

Particularly interesting was that Fed officials lowered their estimate of the longer-run unemployment rate, to 5 to 5.2 percent, from 5.2 to 5.5 percent. With joblessness hitting 5.5 percent in February, that implied that policy makers are convinced the job market has more room to tighten before it becomes too tight. Fed leaders now forecast unemployment rates in 2016 and 2017 that are a bit below what many view as the long-term sustainable level, which one would expect to translate into rising wages.

In other words, they want to run the economy a little hot for the next couple of years to help spur the kinds of wage gains that might return inflation to the 2 percent level they aim for, but which they have persistently undershot in recent years.

Apart from the details of the dovish monetary policy signals Ms. Yellen and her colleagues sent, it is clear she wanted to jolt markets out of any feeling that policy is on a preordained path.

At times over the last couple of years, the Fed had seemed to set a policy course and then go on a forced march until it got there, regardless of whether the jobs numbers were good or bad, or whether inflation was rising or falling. That is certainly how it felt when the Fed decided in December 2013 to wind down its quantitative easing policies by $10 billion per meeting, which it did through the first nine months of 2014 with few signs of re-evaluation as conditions evolved.

In her first news conference as chairwoman a year ago, Ms. Yellen had suggested that rate increases might be on a similar preordained path by saying that she could imagine rate increases “around six months” after the conclusion of quantitative easing. (That comment increasingly looks to have been a rookie mistake, and she later backed away from it.)

Since then, the job market has shown strong improvement, particularly in terms of jobs added and the falling unemployment rate. But meaningful wage gains are still lacking. Meanwhile, oil prices have plummeted and the dollar has risen on global markets, both of which are pushing inflation far below the Fed’s 2 percent target (leaders of the central bank expect inflation of 0.6 to 0.8 percent in 2015).

There are likely to be plenty of twists and turns in the coming months. After this week’s meeting, Ms. Yellen reinforced the message she has been trying to convey that the committee really will adapt its policy to incoming information rather than simply carry on with the path it set a year ago.

If the strengthening dollar and falling oil prices start to translate into still-lower expectations for future inflation, the Fed will hold off from rate rises — and the same if wage gains and other job market indicators show a lack of progress.

Conversely, if the job market recovery keeps going gangbusters and it becomes clear that inflation is going to rise back toward 2 percent, Ms. Yellen does not want to be constrained by language about “patience.”

“This change does not necessarily mean that an increase will occur in June,” Ms. Yellen said, “though we cannot rule that out.”

She has now bought herself some latitude to decide when and how the Fed ushers in an era of tighter money. Now the question is just how patient or impatient American economic conditions will allow her to be.

Taylor rule

In economics, a Taylor rule is a monetary-policy rule that stipulates how much the central bank should change the nominal interest rate in response to changes in inflation, output, or other economic conditions. In particular, the rule stipulates that for each one-percent increase in inflation, the central bank should raise the nominal interest rate by more than one percentage point. This aspect of the rule is often called the Taylor principle.

The rule of was first proposed by John B. Taylor,[1] and simultaneously by Dale W. Henderson and Warwick McKibbin in 1993.[2] It is intended to foster price stability and full employment by systematically reducing uncertainty and increasing the credibility of future actions by the central bank. It may also avoid the inefficiencies of time inconsistency from the exercise ofdiscretionary policy.[3][4] The Taylor rule synthesized, and provided a compromise between, competing schools of economics thought in a language devoid of rhetorical passion.[5] Although many issues remain unresolved and views still differ about how the Taylor rule can best be applied in practice, research shows that the rule has advanced the practice of central banking.[6]

As an equation

According to Taylor’s original version of the rule, the nominal interest rate should respond to divergences of actual inflation rates from target inflation rates and of actual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) from potential GDP:

In this equation, both and should be positive (as a rough rule of thumb, Taylor’s 1993 paper proposed setting ).[7] That is, the rule “recommends” a relatively high interest rate (a “tight” monetary policy) when inflation is above its target or when output is above its full-employment level, in order to reduce inflationary pressure. It recommends a relatively low interest rate (“easy” monetary policy) in the opposite situation, to stimulate output. Sometimes monetary policy goals may conflict, as in the case of stagflation, when inflation is above its target while output is below full employment. In such a situation, a Taylor rule specifies the relative weights given to reducing inflation versus increasing output.

The Taylor principle

By specifying , the Taylor rule says that an increase in inflation by one percentage point should prompt the central bank to raise the nominal interest rate by more than one percentage point (specifically, by , the sum of the two coefficients on in the equation above). Since the real interest rate is (approximately) the nominal interest rate minus inflation, stipulating implies that when inflation rises, the real interest rate should be increased. The idea that the real interest rate should be raised to cool the economy when inflation increases (requiring the nominal interest rate to increase more than inflation does) has sometimes been called the Taylor principle.[8]

During an EconTalk podcast Taylor explained the rule in simple terms using three variables: inflation rate, GDP growth, and the interest rate. If inflation were to rise by 1%, the proper response would be to raise the interest rate by 1.5% (Taylor explains that it doesn’t always need to be exactly 1.5%, but being larger than 1% is essential). If GDP falls by 1% relative to its growth path, then the proper response is to cut the interest rate by .5%.[9]

Alternative versions of the rule

While the Taylor principle has proved very influential, there is more debate about the other terms that should enter into the rule. According to some simple New Keynesian macroeconomic models, insofar as the central bank keeps inflation stable, the degree of fluctuation in output will be optimized (Blanchard and Gali call this property the ‘divine coincidence‘). In this case, the central bank need not take fluctuations in the output gap into account when setting interest rates (that is, it may optimally set .) On the other hand, other economists have proposed including additional terms in the Taylor rule to take into account money gap[10] or financial conditions: for example, the interest rate might be raised when stock prices, housing prices, or interest rate spreads increase.

Empirical relevance

Although the Federal Reserve does not explicitly follow the Taylor rule, many analysts have argued that the rule provides a fairly accurate summary of US monetary policy under Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan.[11][12] Similar observations have been made about central banks in other developed economies, both in countries like Canada and New Zealand that have officially adopted inflation targeting rules, and in others like Germany where the Bundesbank‘s policy did not officially target the inflation rate.[13][14] This observation has been cited by Clarida, Galí, and Gertler as a reason why inflation had remained under control and the economy had been relatively stable (the so-called ‘Great Moderation‘) in most developed countries from the 1980s through the 2000s.[11] However, according to Taylor, the rule was not followed in part of the 2000s, possibly leading to the housing bubble.[15][16] Certain research has determined that some households form their expectations about the future path of interest rates, inflation, and unemployment in a way that is consistent with Taylor-type rules.[17]

Criticisms

Athanasios Orphanides (2003) claims that the Taylor rule can misguide policy makers since they face real-time data. He shows that the Taylor rule matches the US funds rate less perfectly when accounting for these informational limitations and that an activist policy following the Taylor rule would have resulted in an inferior macroeconomic performance during the Great Inflation of the seventies.[18]

Story 1: The Fed’s Long and Winding Road Back To A Normal Monetary Policy Starting in June 2015 With a .75% Increase in The Federal Fund’s Interest Rate Target — Two Years Too Late — Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah — Imagine, Stand By Me — Videos

Story 1: First Good Jobs Report In Years with 321,000 Jobs Created In November With 5.8% Unemployment Rate U-3, 9.1 Million Unemployed — Still 10-12 Million Jobs Short Due To Low Labor Participation Rate of 62.8% — Years Away From Near Full Unemployment Rate of 3% With 67% Labor Participation Rate — National Debt Hits $18 Trillion and Climbing — Videos

Average Weeks Unemployed

33.0%

Series Id: LNS13008275
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Average Weeks Unemployed
Labor force status: Unemployed
Type of data: Number of weeks
Age: 16 years and over

Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Annual

2000

13.1

12.6

12.7

12.4

12.6

12.3

13.4

12.9

12.2

12.7

12.4

12.5

2001

12.7

12.8

12.8

12.4

12.1

12.7

12.9

13.3

13.2

13.3

14.3

14.5

2002

14.7

15.0

15.4

16.3

16.8

16.9

16.9

16.5

17.6

17.8

17.6

18.5

2003

18.5

18.5

18.1

19.4

19.0

19.9

19.7

19.2

19.5

19.3

19.9

19.8

2004

19.9

20.1

19.8

19.6

19.8

20.5

18.8

18.8

19.4

19.5

19.7

19.4

2005

19.5

19.1

19.5

19.6

18.6

17.9

17.6

18.4

17.9

17.9

17.5

17.5

2006

16.9

17.8

17.1

16.7

17.1

16.6

17.1

17.1

17.1

16.3

16.2

16.1

2007

16.3

16.7

17.8

16.9

16.6

16.5

17.2

17.0

16.3

17.0

17.3

16.6

2008

17.5

16.9

16.5

16.9

16.6

17.1

17.0

17.7

18.6

19.9

18.9

19.9

2009

19.8

20.2

20.9

21.7

22.4

23.9

25.1

25.3

26.6

27.5

28.9

29.7

2010

30.3

29.9

31.6

33.3

33.9

34.5

33.8

33.6

33.4

34.2

33.9

34.8

2011

37.2

37.5

39.2

38.7

39.5

39.7

40.4

40.2

40.2

39.1

40.3

40.7

2012

40.1

40.0

39.4

39.3

39.6

40.0

38.8

39.1

39.4

40.3

39.2

38.0

2013

35.4

36.9

37.0

36.6

36.9

35.7

36.7

37.0

36.8

36.0

37.1

37.1

2014

35.4

37.1

35.6

35.1

34.5

33.5

32.4

31.7

31.5

32.7

33.0

Not In Labor Force

2,109,000

Series Id: LNU05026642
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Searched For Work and Available
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Available to work now

Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Annual

2000

1207

1281

1219

1216

1113

1142

1172

1097

1166

1044

1100

1125

1157

2001

1295

1337

1109

1131

1157

1170

1232

1364

1335

1398

1331

1330

1266

2002

1532

1423

1358

1397

1467

1380

1507

1456

1501

1416

1401

1432

1439

2003

1598

1590

1577

1399

1428

1468

1566

1665

1544

1586

1473

1483

1531

2004

1670

1691

1643

1526

1533

1492

1557

1587

1561

1647

1517

1463

1574

2005

1804

1673

1588

1511

1428

1583

1516

1583

1438

1414

1415

1589

1545

2006

1644

1471

1468

1310

1388

1584

1522

1592

1299

1478

1366

1252

1448

2007

1577

1451

1385

1391

1406

1454

1376

1365

1268

1364

1363

1344

1395

2008

1729

1585

1352

1414

1416

1558

1573

1640

1604

1637

1947

1908

1614

2009

2130

2051

2106

2089

2210

2176

2282

2270

2219

2373

2323

2486

2226

2010

2539

2527

2255

2432

2223

2591

2622

2370

2548

2602

2531

2609

2487

2011

2800

2730

2434

2466

2206

2680

2785

2575

2511

2555

2591

2540

2573

2012

2809

2608

2352

2363

2423

2483

2529

2561

2517

2433

2505

2614

2516

2013

2443

2588

2326

2347

2164

2582

2414

2342

2302

2283

2096

2427

2360

2014

2592

2303

2168

2160

2130

2028

2178

2141

2226

2192

2109

Not In Labor Force Searched For Work and Available, Discouraged Reasons For Not Currently Looking

698,000

Series Id: LNU05026645
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Not in Labor Force, Searched For Work and Available, Discouraged Reasons For Not Currently Looking
Labor force status: Not in labor force
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Job desires/not in labor force: Want a job now
Reasons not in labor force: Discouragement over job prospects (Persons who believe no job is available.)

Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Annual

2000

236

267

258

331

280

309

266

203

253

232

236

269

262

2001

301

287

349

349

328

294

310

337

285

331

328

348

321

2002

328

375

330

320

414

342

405

378

392

359

385

403

369

2003

449

450

474

437

482

478

470

503

388

462

457

433

457

2004

432

484

514

492

476

478

504

534

412

429

392

442

466

2005

515

485

480

393

392

476

499

384

362

392

404

451

436

2006

396

386

451

381

323

481

428

448

325

331

349

274

381

2007

442

375

381

399

368

401

367

392

276

320

349

363

369

2008

467

396

401

412

400

420

461

381

467

484

608

642

462

2009

734

731

685

740

792

793

796

758

706

808

861

929

778

2010

1065

1204

994

1197

1083

1207

1185

1110

1209

1219

1282

1318

1173

2011

993

1020

921

989

822

982

1119

977

1037

967

1096

945

989

2012

1059

1006

865

968

830

821

852

844

802

813

979

1068

909

2013

804

885

803

835

780

1027

988

866

852

815

762

917

861

2014

837

755

698

783

697

676

741

775

698

770

698

Total Unemployment Rate U-6

11.4%

Series Id: LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers
Labor force status: Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over
Percent/rates: Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Annual

2000

7.1

7.2

7.1

6.9

7.1

7.0

7.0

7.1

7.0

6.8

7.1

6.9

2001

7.3

7.4

7.3

7.4

7.5

7.9

7.8

8.1

8.7

9.3

9.4

9.6

2002

9.5

9.5

9.4

9.7

9.5

9.5

9.6

9.6

9.6

9.6

9.7

9.8

2003

10.0

10.2

10.0

10.2

10.1

10.3

10.3

10.1

10.4

10.2

10.0

9.8

2004

9.9

9.7

10.0

9.6

9.6

9.5

9.5

9.4

9.4

9.7

9.4

9.2

2005

9.3

9.3

9.1

8.9

8.9

9.0

8.8

8.9

9.0

8.7

8.7

8.6

2006

8.4

8.4

8.2

8.1

8.2

8.4

8.5

8.4

8.0

8.2

8.1

7.9

2007

8.4

8.2

8.0

8.2

8.2

8.3

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.8

2008

9.2

9.0

9.1

9.2

9.7

10.1

10.5

10.8

11.0

11.8

12.6

13.6

2009

14.2

15.2

15.8

15.9

16.5

16.5

16.4

16.7

16.7

17.1

17.1

17.1

2010

16.7

17.0

17.1

17.2

16.6

16.4

16.4

16.5

16.8

16.6

16.9

16.6

2011

16.1

16.0

15.9

16.1

15.8

16.1

16.0

16.1

16.3

15.9

15.6

15.2

2012

15.1

15.0

14.5

14.6

14.8

14.8

14.9

14.7

14.7

14.4

14.4

14.4

2013

14.4

14.3

13.8

13.9

13.8

14.2

13.9

13.6

13.6

13.7

13.1

13.1

2014

12.7

12.6

12.7

12.3

12.2

12.1

12.2

12.0

11.8

11.5

11.4

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until USDL-14-2184
8:30 a.m. (EST) Friday, December 5, 2014
Technical information:
Household data: (202) 691-6378 • cpsinfo@bls.gov • www.bls.gov/cps
Establishment data: (202) 691-6555 • cesinfo@bls.gov • www.bls.gov/ces
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 • PressOffice@bls.gov
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- NOVEMBER 2014
Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 321,000 in November, and the unemployment
rate was unchanged at 5.8 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Job gains were widespread, led by growth in professional and business services, retail
trade, health care, and manufacturing.
Household Survey Data
In November, the unemployment rate held at 5.8 percent, and the number of unemployed
persons was little changed at 9.1 million. Over the year, the unemployment rate and
the number of unemployed persons were down by 1.2 percentage points and 1.7 million,
respectively. (See table A-1.)
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for adult men rose to 5.4 percent
in November. The rates for adult women (5.3 percent), teenagers (17.7 percent), whites
(4.9 percent), blacks (11.1 percent), and Hispanics (6.6 percent) showed little change
over the month. The jobless rate for Asians was 4.8 percent (not seasonally adjusted),
little changed from a year earlier. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)
The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little
changed at 2.8 million in November. These individuals accounted for 30.7 percent of
the unemployed. Over the past 12 months, the number of long-term unemployed declined
by 1.2 million. (See table A-12.)
The civilian labor force participation rate held at 62.8 percent in November and has
been essentially unchanged since April. The employment-population ratio, at 59.2
percent, was unchanged in November but is up by 0.6 percentage point over the year.
(See table A-1.)
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to
as involuntary part-time workers), at 6.9 million, changed little in November. These
individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time
because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time
job. (See table A-8.)
In November, 2.1 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force,
essentially unchanged from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)
These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work,
and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as
unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the
survey. (See table A-16.)
Among the marginally attached, there were 698,000 discouraged workers in November,
little different from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.)
Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe
no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.4 million persons marginally attached
to the labor force in November had not searched for work for reasons such as school
attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)
Establishment Survey Data
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 321,000 in November, compared with an
average monthly gain of 224,000 over the prior 12 months. In November, job growth
was widespread, led by gains in professional and business services, retail trade,
health care, and manufacturing. (See table B-1.)
Employment in professional and business services increased by 86,000 in November,
compared with an average gain of 57,000 per month over the prior 12 months. Within
the industry, accounting and bookkeeping services added 16,000 jobs in November.
Employment continued to trend up in temporary help services (+23,000), management
and technical consulting services (+7,000), computer systems design and related
services (+7,000), and architectural and engineering services (+5,000).
Employment in retail trade rose by 50,000 in November, compared with an average
gain of 22,000 per month over the prior 12 months. In November, job gains occurred
in motor vehicle and parts dealers (+11,000); clothing and accessories stores
(+11,000); sporting goods, hobby, book, and music stores (+9,000); and nonstore
retailers (+6,000).
Health care added 29,000 jobs over the month. Employment continued to trend up in
offices of physicians (+7,000), home health care services (+5,000), outpatient care
centers (+4,000), and hospitals (+4,000). Over the past 12 months, employment in
health care has increased by 261,000.
In November, manufacturing added 28,000 jobs. Durable goods manufacturers accounted
for 17,000 of the increase, with small gains in most of the component industries.
Employment in nondurable goods increased by 11,000, with plastics and rubber products
(+7,000) accounting for most of the gain. Over the year, manufacturing has added
171,000 jobs, largely in durable goods.
Financial activities added 20,000 jobs in November, with half of the gain in insurance
carriers and related activities. Over the past year, insurance has contributed 70,000
jobs to the overall employment gain of 114,000 in financial activities.
Transportation and warehousing employment increased by 17,000 in November, with a
gain in couriers and messengers (+5,000). Over the past 12 months, transportation
and warehousing has added 143,000 jobs.
Employment in food services and drinking places continued to trend up in November
(+27,000) and has increased by 321,000 over the year.
Construction employment also continued to trend up in November (+20,000). Employment in
specialty trade contractors rose by 21,000, mostly in the residential component. Over
the past 12 months, construction has added 213,000 jobs, with just over half the gain
among specialty trade contractors.
In November, the average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose
by 0.1 hour to 34.6 hours. The manufacturing workweek rose by 0.2 hour to 41.1 hours,
and factory overtime edged up by 0.1 hour to 3.5 hours. The average workweek for
production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at
33.8 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)
Average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 9 cents
to $24.66 in November. Over the year, average hourly earnings have risen by 2.1 percent.
In November, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory
employees increased by 4 cents to $20.74. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for September was revised from +256,000
to +271,000, and the change for October was revised from +214,000 to +243,000. With
these revisions, employment gains in September and October combined were 44,000 more
than previously reported.
_____________
The Employment Situation for December is scheduled to be released on Friday,
January 9, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. (EST).
__________________________________________________________________________________
| |
| Upcoming Changes to the Employment Situation News Release |
| |
|Effective with the release of January 2015 data on February 6, 2015, the U.S. |
|Bureau of Labor Statistics will introduce several changes to The Employment |
|Situation news release tables. |
| |
|Household survey table A-2 will introduce seasonally adjusted series on the labor |
|force characteristics of Asians. These series will appear in addition to the not |
|seasonally adjusted data for Asians currently displayed in the table. Also, in |
|summary table A, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for Asians will replace|
|the not seasonally adjusted series that is currently displayed for the group. |
| |
|Household survey table A-3 will introduce seasonally adjusted series on the labor |
|force characteristics of Hispanic men age 20 and over, Hispanic women age 20 and |
|over, and Hispanic teenagers age 16 to 19. The not seasonally adjusted series for |
|these groups will continue to be displayed in the table. |
| |
|The establishment survey will introduce two data series: (1) total nonfarm |
|employment, 3-month average change and (2) total private employment, 3-month |
|average change. These new series will be added to establishment survey summary |
|table B. Additionally, in the employment section of summary table B, the list |
|of industries will be expanded to include utilities (currently published in |
|table B-1). Also, hours and earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees |
|will be removed from summary table B, although these series will continue to be |
|published in establishment survey tables B-7 and B-8. A sample of the new summary |
|table B is available on the BLS website at www.bls.gov/ces/cesnewsumb.pdf. |
|__________________________________________________________________________________|
__________________________________________________________________________________
| |
| Revision of Seasonally Adjusted Household Survey Data |
| |
|In accordance with usual practice, The Employment Situation news release for |
|December 2014, scheduled for January 9, 2015, will incorporate annual revisions in|
|seasonally adjusted household survey data. Seasonally adjusted data for the most |
|recent 5 years are subject to revision. |
|__________________________________________________________________________________|

– Over-the-month changes are not displayed for not seasonally adjusted data.
NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

Footnotes(1) Includes other industries, not shown separately.(2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries.(3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours.(4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls.(5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment.(p) Preliminary

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 2014

BEA 14-59

* See the navigation bar at the right side of the news release text for links to data tables,
contact personnel and their telephone numbers, and supplementary materials.

Real gross domestic product -- the value of the production of goods and services in the United
States, adjusted for price changes -- increased at an annual rate of 3.9 percent in the third quarter of
2014, according to the "second" estimate released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the second
quarter, real GDP increased 4.6 percent.
The GDP estimate released today is based on more complete source data than were available for
the "advance" estimate issued last month. In the advance estimate, the increase in real GDP was 3.5
percent. With the second estimate for the third quarter, private inventory investment decreased less than
previously estimated, and both personal consumption expenditures (PCE) and nonresidential fixed
investment increased more. In contrast, exports increased less than previously estimated (see
"Revisions" on page 3).
The increase in real GDP in the third quarter reflected positive contributions from PCE,
nonresidential fixed investment, federal government spending, exports, residential fixed investment, and
state and local government spending that were partly offset by a negative contribution from private
inventory investment. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP, decreased.
The deceleration in the percent change in real GDP reflected a downturn in private inventory
investment and decelerations in exports, in nonresidential fixed investment, in state and local
government spending, in PCE, and in residential fixed investment that were partly offset by a downturn
in imports and an upturn in federal government spending.
The price index for gross domestic purchases, which measures prices paid by U.S. residents,
increased 1.4 percent in the third quarter, 0.1 percentage point more than in the advance estimate; this
index increased 2.0 percent in the second quarter. Excluding food and energy prices, the price index for
gross domestic purchases increased 1.6 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 1.7
percent in the second.
_____
FOOTNOTE. Quarterly estimates are expressed at seasonally adjusted annual rates, unless otherwise
specified. Quarter-to-quarter dollar changes are differences between these published estimates. Percent
changes are calculated from unrounded data and are annualized. "Real" estimates are in chained (2009)
dollars. Price indexes are chain-type measures.
This news release is available on BEA's Web site along with the Technical Note and Highlights related
to this release. For information on revisions, see "The Revisions to GDP, GDI, and Their
Major Components."
_____
Real personal consumption expenditures increased 2.2 percent in the third quarter, compared
with an increase of 2.5 percent in the second. Durable goods increased 8.7 percent, compared with an
increase of 14.1 percent. Nondurable goods increased 2.2 percent, the same increase as in the second
quarter. Services increased 1.2 percent, compared with an increase of 0.9 percent.
Real nonresidential fixed investment increased 7.1 percent in the third quarter, compared with an
increase of 9.7 percent in the second. Investment in nonresidential structures increased 1.1 percent,
compared with an increase of 12.6 percent. Investment in equipment increased 10.7 percent, compared
with an increase of 11.2 percent. Investment in intellectual property products increased 6.4 percent,
compared with an increase of 5.5 percent. Real residential fixed investment increased 2.7 percent,
compared with an increase of 8.8 percent.
Real exports of goods and services increased 4.9 percent in the third quarter, compared with an
increase of 11.1 percent in the second. Real imports of goods and services decreased 0.7 percent, in
contrast to an increase of 11.3 percent.
Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment increased 9.9 percent
in the third quarter, in contrast to a decrease of 0.9 percent in the second. National defense increased
16.0 percent, compared with an increase of 0.9 percent. Nondefense increased 0.4 percent, in contrast to
a decrease of 3.8 percent. Real state and local government consumption expenditures and gross
investment increased 0.8 percent, compared with an increase of 3.4 percent.
The change in real private inventories subtracted 0.12 percentage point from the third-quarter
change in real GDP after adding 1.42 percentage points to the second-quarter change. Private
businesses increased inventories $79.1 billion in the third quarter, following increases of $84.8 billion in
the second quarter and $35.2 billion in the first.
Real final sales of domestic product -- GDP less change in private inventories -- increased 4.1
percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 3.2 percent in the second.
Gross domestic purchases
Real gross domestic purchases -- purchases by U.S. residents of goods and services wherever
produced -- increased 3.0 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 4.8 percent in the
second.
Gross national product
Real gross national product -- the value of the goods and services produced by the labor and
property supplied by U.S. residents -- increased 3.8 percent in the third quarter, compared with an
increase of 4.6 percent in the second. GNP includes, and GDP excludes, net receipts of income from the
rest of the world, which decreased $1.6 billion in the third quarter, in contrast to an increase of $1.4
billion in the second; in the third quarter, receipts decreased $1.1 billion, and payments increased $0.5
billion.
Current-dollar GDP
Current-dollar GDP -- the market value of the production of goods and services in the United
States -- increased 5.3 percent, or $227.0 billion, in the third quarter to a level of $17,555.2 billion. In
the second quarter, current-dollar GDP increased 6.8 percent, or $284.2 billion.
Gross domestic income
Real gross domestic income (GDI), which measures the value of the production of goods and
services in the United States as the costs incurred and the incomes earned on that production, increased
4.5 percent in the third quarter, compared with an increase of 4.0 percent (revised) in the second. For a
given quarter, the estimates of GDP and GDI may differ for a variety of reasons, including the
incorporation of largely independent source data. However, over longer time spans, the estimates of
GDP and GDI tend to follow similar patterns of change.
Revisions
The upward revision to the percent change in real GDP primarily reflected upward revisions to
private inventory investment, to personal consumption expenditures, and to nonresidential fixed
investment that were partly offset by a downward revision to exports and an upward revision to imports.
Advance Estimate Second Estimate
(Percent change from preceding quarter)
Real GDP............................... 3.5 3.9
Current-dollar GDP..................... 4.9 5.3
Real GDI............................... -- 4.5
Gross domestic purchases price index... 1.3 1.4
Corporate Profits
Profits from current production
Profits from current production (corporate profits with inventory valuation adjustment (IVA) and
capital consumption adjustment (CCAdj)) increased $43.8 billion in the third quarter, compared with an
increase of $164.1 billion in the second.
Profits of domestic financial corporations increased $20.3 billion in the third quarter, compared
with an increase of $33.3 billion in the second. Profits of domestic nonfinancial corporations increased
$22.5 billion, compared with an increase of $134.3 billion. The rest-of-the-world component of profits
increased $1.0 billion, in contrast to a decrease of $3.6 billion. This measure is calculated as the
difference between receipts from the rest of the world and payments to the rest of the world. In the third
quarter, receipts were unchanged, and payments decreased $1.0 billion.
Taxes on corporate income decreased $4.8 billion in the third quarter, in contrast to an increase
of $45.7 billion in the second. Profits after tax with IVA and CCAdj increased $48.6 billion, compared
with an increase of $118.4 billion.
Dividends decreased $3.9 billion in the third quarter, compared with a decrease of $0.5 billion in
the second. Undistributed profits increased $52.5 billion, compared with an increase of $118.8 billion.
Net cash flow with IVA -- the internal funds available to corporations for investment -- increased $25.1
billion, compared with an increase of $133.4 billion.
The IVA and CCAdj are adjustments that convert inventory withdrawals and depreciation of
fixed assets reported on a tax-return, historical-cost basis to the current-cost economic measures used in
the national income and product accounts. The IVA increased $16.8 billion in the third quarter,
compared with an increase of $11.9 billion in the second. The CCAdj increased $1.2 billion, in contrast
to a decrease of $0.8 billion.
Gross value added of nonfinancial domestic corporate business
In the third quarter, real gross value added of nonfinancial corporations increased, and profits per
unit of real gross value added increased. The increase in unit profits reflected an increase in unit prices
that was partly offset by an increase in unit nonlabor costs; unit labor costs were unchanged.
* * *
BEA's national, international, regional, and industry estimates; the Survey of Current Business;
and BEA news releases are available without charge on BEA's Web site at www.bea.gov. By visiting
the site, you can also subscribe to receive free e-mail summaries of BEA releases and announcements.
* * *
Next release -- December 23, 2014 at 8:30 A.M. EST for:
Gross Domestic Product: Third Quarter 2014 (Third Estimate)
Corporate Profits: Third Quarter 2014 (Revised Estimate)
* * *
Release dates in 2015
Gross Domestic Product
2014: IV and 2014 annual 2015: I 2015: II 2015: III
Advance.... January 30 April 29 July 30 October 29
Second..... February 27 May 29 August 27 November 24
Third...... March 27 June 24 September 25 December 22
Corporate Profits
Preliminary... .. May 29 August 27 November 24
Revised....... March 27 June 24 September 25 December 22

Story 1: Asset Price Bubble Bursts Coming In October With 69 Months of Near Zero Federal Funds Interest Rates! — Interest Rate Suppression or Price Control and Manipulation Will Blow Up Economy — Suppressing Savings and Investment With Low Interest Rates Is A Formula For Diaster and Depression — Panic Time — Start A War Over Oil — Meltdown America –Videos

Amortized discount or premium on bills, notes and bonds is also included in the monthly interest expense.

The fiscal year represents the total interest expense on the Debt Outstanding for a given fiscal year. This includes the months of October through September. View current month details (XLS Format, File size 199KB, uploaded 09/05/2014).

Note: To read or print a PDF document, you need the Adobe Acrobat Reader (v5.0 or higher) software installed on your computer. You can download the Adobe Acrobat Reader from the Adobe Website.

Here a bubble, there a bubble: Ol’ Marc Faber

Even after the Dow and the S&P 500 closed at new all-time highs, closely followed contrarian Marc Faber keeps sounding the alarm.

“We have a bubble in everything, everywhere,” the publisher of The Gloom, Boom & Doom Report told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Friday. Faber has long argued that the Federal Reserve’s massive asset purchasing programs and near-zero interest rates have inflated stock prices.

The catalyst for a market decline, as he sees it, could be a “raise in interest rates, not engineered by the Fed,” referring an increase in bond yields.

Faber also expressed concern about American consumers. “Their cost of living have gone up more than the salary increases, so they’re getting squeezed. So that’s why retailing is not doing particularly well.”

A real black swan event, he argued, would be a global recession. “The big surprise will be that the global economy slows down and goes into recession. And that will shock markets.”

If economies around the world can’t recovery with the Fed and other central banks pumping easy money into the system, that would send a dire message, Faber added. He believes the best way for world economies to recover is to cut the size of government.

There’s a dual-economy in the U.S. and around the world with the rich doing really well and others struggling, he said. “[But] the rich will get creamed one day, especially in Europe, on wealth taxes.”

The Federal Reserve Wednesday reassured investors that it will hold interest rates near zero for a “considerable time” after it ends the bond-buying program known as quantitative easing in October. In response, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (^DJI) closed at a new record high.

Former Director of the Office of Management and Budget and author of the book, The Great Deformation, David Stockman, has significant concerns about that very policy.

“I’m worried… that we’ve got the greatest bubble created by a central bank in human history,” he told Yahoo Finance.

In a recent blog post, Stockman offered a handful of high-flying stocks as evidence of what he sees as “madness.”

“…Twitter, is all that is required to remind us that once

again markets are trading in the nosebleed section

of history, rivaling even the madness of March 2000.”

Behind the madness

In an interview with Yahoo Finance, Stockman blamed Fed policy for creating that madness.

“We have been shoving zero-cost money into the financial markets for 6-years running,” he said. “That’s the kerosene that drives speculative trading – the carry trades. That’s what the gamblers use to fund their position as they move from one momentum play and trade to another.”

And that, he says, is not sustainable. While Stockman believes tech stocks are especially overvalued, he warns that it’s not just tech valuations that are inflated. “Everything’s massively overvalued, and it’s predicated on zero-cost overnight money that continues these carry trades; It can’t continue.”

And he still believes, as he has for some time – so far, incorrectly – that there will be a day of reckoning.

“When the trades begin to unwind because the carry cost has to normalize, you’re going to have a dramatic re-pricing dislocation in these financial markets.”

As Yahoo Finance’s Lauren Lyster points out in the associated video, investors who heeded Stockman’s advice last year would have missed out on a 28% run-up in stocks. But Stockman remains steadfast in his belief that the current Fed policy and the resultant market behavior can not continue. “I think what the Fed is doing is so unprecedented, what is happening in the markets is so unnatural,” he said. “This is dangerous, combustible stuff, and I don’t know when the explosion occurs – when the collapse suddenly is upon us – but when it happens, people will be happy that they got out of the way if they did.”

Includes securities lent to dealers under the overnight securities lending facility; refer to table 1A.

2.

Face value of the securities.

3.

Compensation that adjusts for the effect of inflation on the original face value of inflation-indexed securities.

4.

Guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae. The current face value shown is the remaining principal balance of
the securities.

5.

Reflects the premium or discount, which is the difference between the purchase price and the face value of the securities that has not been amortized. For U.S. Treasury and Federal agency debt securities, amortization is on a straight-line basis. For mortgage-backed securities, amortization is on an effective-interest basis.

6.

Cash value of agreements.

7.

Includes credit extended by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to eligible borrowers through the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility.

8.

Refer to table 4 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

9.

Refer to table 5 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

10.

Refer to table 6 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

11.

Refer to table 7 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

12.

Dollar value of foreign currency held under these agreements valued at the exchange rate to be used when the foreign currency is returned
to the foreign central bank. This exchange rate equals the market exchange rate used when the foreign currency was acquired from the
foreign central bank.

13.

Includes accrued interest, which represents the daily accumulation of interest earned, and other accounts receivable. Also, includes Reserve Bank premises and equipment net of allowances for depreciation.

14.

Revalued daily at current foreign currency exchange rates.

15.

Estimated.

16.

Cash value of agreements, which are collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities, federal agency debt securities, and mortgage-backed securities.

17.

Includes deposits held at the Reserve Banks by international and multilateral organizations, government-sponsored enterprises, and designated financial market utilities.

18.

Includes the liabilities of Maiden Lane LLC, Maiden Lane II LLC, Maiden Lane III LLC, and TALF LLC to entities other than the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, including liabilities that have recourse only to the portfolio holdings of these LLCs. Refer to table 4 through table 7 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9. Also includes the liability for interest on Federal Reserve notes due to U.S. Treasury. Refer to table 8 and table 9.

Sources: Federal Reserve Banks and the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

1A. Memorandum Items

Millions of dollars

Memorandum item

Averages of daily figures

Wednesday
Sep 10, 2014

Week ended
Sep 10, 2014

Change from week ended

Sep 3, 2014

Sep 11, 2013

Securities held in custody for foreign official and international accounts

3,338,309

– 417

+ 61,832

3,343,937

Marketable U.S. Treasury securities1

3,010,563

– 456

+ 86,414

3,016,027

Federal agency debt and mortgage-backed securities2

285,805

+ 28

– 29,008

285,934

Other securities3

41,942

+ 12

+ 4,427

41,976

Securities lent to dealers

10,669

+ 1,648

– 1,429

11,123

Overnight facility4

10,669

+ 1,648

– 1,429

11,123

U.S. Treasury securities

9,860

+ 1,721

– 1,405

10,373

Federal agency debt securities

810

– 72

– 23

750

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

1.

Includes securities and U.S. Treasury STRIPS at face value, and inflation compensation on TIPS. Does not include securities pledged as collateral to foreign official and international account holders against reverse repurchase agreements with the Federal Reserve presented in tables 1, 8, and 9.

2.

Face value of federal agency securities and current face value of mortgage-backed securities, which is the remaining principal balance of the securities.

2. Maturity Distribution of Securities, Loans, and Selected Other Assets and Liabilities, September 10, 2014

Millions of dollars

Remaining Maturity

Within 15
days

16 days to
90 days

91 days to
1 year

Over 1 year
to 5 years

Over 5 year
to 10 years

Over 10
years

All

Loans1

118

234

0

0

0

…

352

U.S. Treasury securities2

Holdings

0

90

3,194

1,037,162

742,261

657,930

2,440,637

Weekly changes

0

0

0

+ 1,615

– 1

+ 2,037

+ 3,651

Federal agency debt securities3

Holdings

1,556

1,329

3,584

32,746

0

2,347

41,562

Weekly changes

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Mortgage-backed securities4

Holdings

0

0

0

10

4,698

1,673,614

1,678,322

Weekly changes

0

0

0

0

+ 863

– 857

+ 6

Asset-backed securities held by
TALF LLC5

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Repurchase agreements6

0

0

…

…

…

…

0

Central bank liquidity swaps7

77

0

0

0

0

0

77

Reverse repurchase agreements6

267,602

0

…

…

…

…

267,602

Term deposits

0

0

0

…

…

…

0

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.
…Not applicable.

1.

Excludes the loans from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) to Maiden Lane LLC, Maiden Lane II LLC, Maiden
Lane III LLC, and TALF LLC. The loans were eliminated when preparing the FRBNY’s statement of condition consistent with consolidation
under generally accepted accounting principles.

2.

Face value. For inflation-indexed securities, includes the original face value and compensation that adjusts for the effect of inflation on the
original face value of such securities.

3.

Face value.

4.

Guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae. The current face value shown is the remaining principal balance of the securities.

5.

Face value of asset-backed securities held by TALF LLC, which is the remaining principal balance of the underlying assets.

6.

Cash value of agreements.

7.

Dollar value of foreign currency held under these agreements valued at the exchange rate to be used when the foreign currency is returned to
the foreign central bank. This exchange rate equals the market exchange rate used when the foreign currency was acquired from the foreign
central bank.

3. Supplemental Information on Mortgage-Backed Securities

Millions of dollars

Account name

Wednesday

Sep 10, 2014

Mortgage-backed securities held outright1

1,678,322

Commitments to buy mortgage-backed securities2

80,643

Commitments to sell mortgage-backed securities2

0

Cash and cash equivalents3

4

1.

Guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae. The current face value shown is the remaining principal balance of the securities.

2.

Current face value. Generally settle within 180 days and include commitments associated with outright transactions, dollar rolls, and coupon swaps.

3.

This amount is included in other Federal Reserve assets in table 1 and in other assets in table 8 and table 9.

4. Information on Principal Accounts of Maiden Lane LLC

Millions of dollars

Account name

Wednesday

Sep 10, 2014

Net portfolio holdings of Maiden Lane LLC1

1,665

Outstanding principal amount of loan extended by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York2

Fair value. Fair value reflects an estimate of the price that would be received upon selling an asset if the transaction were to be conducted in an orderly market on the measurement date. Revalued quarterly. This table reflects valuations as of June 30, 2014. Any assets purchased after
this valuation date are initially recorded at cost until their estimated fair value as of the purchase date becomes available.

2.

Book value. This amount was eliminated when preparing the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s statement of condition consistent with consolidation under generally accepted accounting principles. Refer to the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

3.

Book value. The fair value of these obligations is included in other liabilities and capital in table 1 and in other liabilities and accrued dividends in table 8 and table 9.

Note: On June 26, 2008, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) extended credit to Maiden Lane LLC under the authority of section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act. This limited liability company was formed to acquire certain assets of Bear Stearns and to manage those assets through time to maximize repayment of the credit extended and to minimize disruption to financial markets. Payments by Maiden Lane LLC from the proceeds of the net portfolio holdings will be made in the following order: operating expenses of the LLC, principal due to the FRBNY, interest due to the FRBNY, principal due to JPMorgan Chase & Co., and interest due to JPMorgan Chase & Co. Any remaining funds will be paid to the FRBNY.

5. Information on Principal Accounts of Maiden Lane II LLC

Millions of dollars

Account name

Wednesday

Sep 10, 2014

Net portfolio holdings of Maiden Lane II LLC1

63

Outstanding principal amount of loan extended by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York2

0

Accrued interest payable to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York2

0

Deferred payment and accrued interest payable to subsidiaries of American International Group, Inc.3

0

1.

Fair value. Fair value reflects an estimate of the price that would be received upon selling an asset if the transaction were to be conducted in an orderly market on the measurement date. Revalued quarterly. This table reflects valuations as of June 30, 2014. Any assets purchased after
this valuation date are initially recorded at cost until their estimated fair value as of the purchase date becomes available.

2.

Book value. This amount was eliminated when preparing the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s statement of condition consistent with consolidation under generally accepted accounting principles. Refer to the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

3.

Book value. The deferred payment represents the portion of the proceeds of the net portfolio holdings due to subsidiaries of American
International Group, Inc. in accordance with the asset purchase agreement. The fair value of this payment and accrued interest payable are
included in other liabilities and capital in table 1 and in other liabilities and accrued dividends in table 8 and table 9.

Note: On December 12, 2008, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) began extending credit to Maiden Lane II LLC under the authority of section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act. This limited liability company was formed to purchase residential mortgage-backed securities from the U.S. securities lending reinvestment portfolio of subsidiaries of American International Group, Inc. (AIG subsidiaries). Payments by Maiden Lane II LLC from the proceeds of the net portfolio holdings will be made in the following order: operating expenses of Maiden Lane II LLC, principal due to the FRBNY, interest due to the FRBNY, and deferred payment and interest due to AIG subsidiaries. Any remaining funds will be shared by the FRBNY and AIG subsidiaries.

6. Information on Principal Accounts of Maiden Lane III LLC

Millions of dollars

Account name

Wednesday

Sep 10, 2014

Net portfolio holdings of Maiden Lane III LLC1

22

Outstanding principal amount of loan extended by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York2

0

Accrued interest payable to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York2

0

Outstanding principal amount and accrued interest on loan payable to American International Group, Inc.3

0

1.

Fair value. Fair value reflects an estimate of the price that would be received upon selling an asset if the transaction were to be conducted in an orderly market on the measurement date. Revalued quarterly. This table reflects valuations as of June 30, 2014. Any assets purchased after
this valuation date are initially recorded at cost until their estimated fair value as of the purchase date becomes available.

2.

Book value. This amount was eliminated when preparing the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s statement of condition consistent with consolidation under generally accepted accounting principles. Refer to the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

3.

Book value. The fair value of these obligations is included in other liabilities and capital in table 1 and in other liabilities and accrued dividends in table 8 and table 9.

Note: On November 25, 2008, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) began extending credit to Maiden Lane III LLC under the authority of section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act. This limited liability company was formed to purchase multi-sector collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) on which the Financial Products group of American International Group, Inc. (AIG) has written credit default swap (CDS) contracts. In connection with the purchase of CDOs, the CDS counterparties will concurrently unwind the related CDS transactions. Payments by Maiden Lane III LLC from the proceeds of the net portfolio holdings will be made in the following order: operating expenses of Maiden Lane III LLC, principal due to the FRBNY, interest due to the FRBNY, principal due to AIG, and interest due to AIG. Any remaining funds will be shared by the FRBNY and AIG.

7. Information on Principal Accounts of TALF LLC

Millions of dollars

Account name

Wednesday

Sep 10, 2014

Asset-backed securities holdings1

0

Other investments, net

44

Net portfolio holdings of TALF LLC

44

Outstanding principal amount of loan extended by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York2

0

Accrued interest payable to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York2

0

Funding provided by U.S. Treasury to TALF LLC, including accrued interest payable3

0

1.

Fair value. Fair value reflects an estimate of the price that would be received upon selling an asset if the transaction were to be conducted in an orderly market on the measurement date.

2.

Book value. This amount was eliminated when preparing the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s statement of condition consistent with consolidation under generally accepted accounting principles. Refer to the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

3.

Book value. The fair value of these obligations is included in other liabilities and capital in table 1 and in other liabilities and accrued dividends in table 8 and table 9.

Note: On November 25, 2008, the Federal Reserve announced the creation of the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) under theauthority of section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act. The TALF is a facility under which the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) extended loans with a term of up to five years to holders of eligible asset-backed securities. The Federal Reserve closed the TALF for new loan extensions in 2010. The loans provided through the TALF to eligible borrowers are non-recourse, meaning that the obligation of the borrower can be discharged by surrendering the collateral to the FRBNY.

TALF LLC is a limited liability company formed to purchase and manage any asset-backed securities received by the FRBNY in connection with the decision of a borrower not to repay a TALF loan. TALF LLC has committed, for a fee, to purchase all asset-backed securities received by the FRBNY in conjunction with a TALF loan at a price equal to the TALF loan plus accrued but unpaid interest. Prior to January 15, 2013, the U.S. Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) committed backup funding to TALF LLC, providing credit protection to the FRBNY. However, the accumulated fees and income collected through the TALF and held by TALF LLC now exceed the remaining amount of TALF loans outstanding. Accordingly, the TARP credit protection commitment has been terminated, and TALF LLC has begun to distribute excess proceeds to the Treasury and the FRBNY. Any remaining funds will be shared by the FRBNY and the U.S. Treasury.

Includes securities lent to dealers under the overnight securities lending facility; refer to table 1A.

2.

Face value of the securities.

3.

Compensation that adjusts for the effect of inflation on the original face value of inflation-indexed securities.

4.

Guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae. The current face value shown is the remaining principal balance of the securities.

5.

Reflects the premium or discount, which is the difference between the purchase price and the face value of the securities that has not been amortized. For U.S. Treasury and Federal agency debt securities, amortization is on a straight-line basis. For mortgage-backed securities, amortization is on an effective-interest basis.

6.

Cash value of agreements, which are collateralized by U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities.

7.

Refer to table 4 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

8.

Refer to table 5 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

9.

Refer to table 6 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

10.

Refer to table 7 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9.

11.

Dollar value of foreign currency held under these agreements valued at the exchange rate to be used when the foreign currency is returned to
the foreign central bank. This exchange rate equals the market exchange rate used when the foreign currency was acquired from the foreign
central bank.

12.

Revalued daily at current foreign currency exchange rates.

13.

Includes accrued interest, which represents the daily accumulation of interest earned, and other accounts receivable.

14.

Cash value of agreements, which are collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities, federal agency debt securities, and mortgage-backed securities.

15.

Includes deposits held at the Reserve Banks by international and multilateral organizations, government-sponsored enterprises, and designated financial market utilities.

16.

Includes the liabilities of Maiden Lane LLC, Maiden Lane II LLC, Maiden Lane III LLC, and TALF LLC to entities other than the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York, including liabilities that have recourse only to the portfolio holdings of these LLCs. Refer to table 4 through table 7 and the note on consolidation accompanying table 9. Also includes the liability for interest on Federal Reserve notes due to U.S. Treasury.

9. Statement of Condition of Each Federal Reserve Bank, September 10, 2014

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding. Footnotes appear at the end of the table.

9. Statement of Condition of Each Federal Reserve Bank, September 10, 2014 (continued)

Millions of dollars

Assets, liabilities, and capital

Total

Boston

New York

Philadelphia

Cleveland

Richmond

Atlanta

Chicago

St. Louis

Minneapolis

Kansas

Dallas

San

City

Francisco

Liabilities

Federal Reserve notes outstanding

1,443,974

44,572

489,349

42,766

65,118

103,568

212,875

94,569

37,360

21,242

36,783

115,911

179,862

Less: Notes held by F.R. Banks

195,994

5,311

63,063

6,357

8,870

11,177

20,690

11,915

4,937

4,278

5,302

25,736

28,359

Federal Reserve notes, net

1,247,980

39,261

426,285

36,409

56,248

92,391

192,186

82,654

32,423

16,964

31,481

90,175

151,503

Reverse repurchase agreements14

267,602

5,413

164,244

6,411

5,843

14,956

14,793

10,937

3,301

1,640

3,525

8,154

28,385

Deposits

2,842,072

53,409

2,030,175

62,876

40,791

131,999

42,547

75,315

7,510

6,356

22,882

38,429

329,783

Term deposits held by depository institutions

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Other deposits held by depository institutions

2,788,954

53,397

1,977,410

62,837

40,788

131,731

42,538

75,306

7,510

6,355

22,881

38,428

329,774

U.S. Treasury, General Account

31,872

0

31,872

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Foreign official

5,241

2

5,214

3

3

8

2

1

0

0

0

1

6

Other15

16,004

11

15,679

36

0

260

7

7

0

0

1

0

3

Deferred availability cash items

721

0

0

0

0

0

611

0

0

110

0

0

0

Interest on Federal Reserve notes due
to U.S. Treasury16

1,693

19

1,199

20

10

23

86

73

20

12

20

54

155

Other liabilities and accrued
dividends17

5,000

167

2,179

211

208

544

361

282

142

118

126

208

454

Total liabilities

4,365,067

98,270

2,624,083

105,927

103,101

239,913

250,583

169,261

43,395

25,200

58,034

137,021

510,279

Capital

Capital paid in

28,170

1,282

9,193

2,093

2,221

5,773

1,608

763

252

117

295

474

4,099

Surplus

28,170

1,282

9,193

2,093

2,221

5,773

1,608

763

252

117

295

474

4,099

Other capital

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Total liabilities and capital

4,421,408

100,833

2,642,468

110,114

107,543

251,460

253,799

170,787

43,900

25,434

58,623

137,969

518,478

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding. Footnotes appear at the end of the table.

9. Statement of Condition of Each Federal Reserve Bank, September 10, 2014 (continued)

1.

Includes securities lent to dealers under the overnight securities lending facility; refer to table 1A.

2.

Face value of the securities.

3.

Includes the original face value of inflation-indexed securities and compensation that adjusts for the effect of inflation on the original face value of such securities.

4.

Guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae. The current face value shown is the remaining principal balance of the securities.

5.

Reflects the premium or discount, which is the difference between the purchase price and the face value of the securities that has not been amortized. For U.S. Treasury and Federal agency debt securities, amortization is on a straight-line basis. For mortgage-backed securities, amortization is on an effective-interest basis.

6.

Cash value of agreements, which are collateralized by U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities.

7.

Refer to table 4 and the note on consolidation below.

8.

Refer to table 5 and the note on consolidation below.

9.

Refer to table 6 and the note on consolidation below.

10.

Refer to table 7 and the note on consolidation below.

11.

Dollar value of foreign currency held under these agreements valued at the exchange rate to be used when the foreign currency is returned to the foreign central bank. This exchange rate
equals the market exchange rate used when the foreign currency was acquired from the foreign central bank.

12.

Revalued daily at current foreign currency exchange rates.

13.

Includes accrued interest, which represents the daily accumulation of interest earned, and other accounts receivable.

14.

Cash value of agreements, which are collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities, federal agency debt securities, and mortgage-backed securities.

15.

Includes deposits held at the Reserve Banks by international and multilateral organizations, government-sponsored enterprises, and designated financial market utilities.

16.

Represents the estimated weekly remittances to U.S. Treasury as interest on Federal Reserve notes or, in those cases where the Reserve Bank’s net earnings are not sufficient to equate surplus to capital paid-in, the deferred asset for interest on Federal Reserve notes. The amount of any deferred asset, which is presented as a negative amount in this line, represents the amount of the Federal Reserve Bank’s earnings that must be retained before remittances to the U.S. Treasury resume. The amounts on this line are calculated in accordance with Board of Governors policy, which requires the Federal Reserve Banks to remit residual earnings to the U.S. Treasury as interest on Federal Reserve notes after providing for the costs of operations, payment of dividends, and the amount necessary to equate surplus with capital paid-in.

17.

Includes the liabilities of Maiden Lane LLC, Maiden Lane II LLC, Maiden Lane III LLC, and TALF LLC to entities other than the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, including liabilities that have recourse only to the portfolio holdings of these LLCs. Refer to table 4 through table 7 and the note on consolidation below.

Note on consolidation:

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) has extended loans to several limited liability companies under the authority of section 13(3) of the Federal Reserve Act. On June 26, 2008, a loan was extended to Maiden Lane LLC, which was formed to acquire certain assets of Bear Stearns. On November 25, 2008, a loan was extended to Maiden Lane III LLC, which was formed to purchase multi-sector collateralized debt obligations on which the Financial Products group of the American International Group, Inc. has written credit default swap contracts. On December 12, 2008, a loan was extended to Maiden Lane II LLC, which was formed to purchase residential mortgage-backed securities from the U.S. securities lending reinvestment portfolio of subsidiaries of American International Group, Inc. On November 25, 2008, the Federal Reserve Board authorized the FRBNY to extend credit to TALF LLC, which was formed to purchase and manage any asset-backed securities received by the FRBNY in connection with the decision of a borrower not to repay a loan extended under the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility.

The FRBNY is the primary beneficiary of TALF LLC, because of the two beneficiaries of the LLC, the FRBNY and the U.S. Treasury, the FRBNY is primarily responsible for directing the financial activities of TALF LLC. The FRBNY is the primary beneficiary of the other LLCs cited above because it will receive a majority of any residual returns of the LLCs and absorb a majority of any residual losses of the LLCs. Consistent with generally accepted accounting principles, the assets and liabilities of these LLCs have been consolidated with the assets and liabilities of the FRBNY in the preparation of the statements of condition shown on this release. As a consequence of the consolidation, the extensions of credit from the FRBNY to the LLCs are eliminated, the net assets of the LLCs appear as assets on the previous page (and in table 1 and table 8), and the liabilities of the LLCs to entities other than the FRBNY, including those with recourse only to the portfolio holdings of the LLCs, are included in other liabilities in this table (and table 1 and table 8).

U.S. Treasury, agency debt, and mortgage-backed securities eligible to be pledged

3,903,013

Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

1.

Includes face value of U.S. Treasury, agency debt, and mortgage-backed securities held outright, compensation to adjust for the effect of inflation on the original face value of inflation-indexed securities, and cash value of repurchase agreements.

2.

Includes securities lent to dealers under the overnight securities lending facility; refer to table 1A.